This
article is part of a UCLA Law Review symposium, “Overpoliced and
Underprotected: Women, Race, and Criminalization.” It analyzes how the U.S.
prison and foster care systems work together to punish black mothers in a way
that helps to preserve race, gender, and class inequalities in a neoliberal
age. The intersection of these systems is only one example of many forms of
overpolicing that overlap and converge in the lives of poor women of color. I
examine the statistical overlap between the prison and foster care populations,
the simultaneous explosion of both systems in recent decades, the injuries that
each system inflicts on black communities, and the way in which their
intersection in the lives of black mothers helps to make social inequities seem
natural. I hope to elucidate how state mechanisms of surveillance and
punishment function jointly to penalize the most marginalized women in our
society while blaming them for their own disadvantaged positions.

The United
States has long followed the English common law view that citizenship can be
attained at birth in two ways: by being born in the U.S. (jus soli), or by
being born abroad as the child of a U.S. citizen (jus sanguinis). The first,
jus soli, is now part of the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution: “All
persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the state wherein
they reside.” Jus soli theoretically does not inquire into the citizenship of
the child’s parents; the relevant fact is that the birth takes place in the
United States. Jus sanguinis, in contrast, arises from the parent-child relationship.
The State Department translates jus sanguinis as “from the bloodline,” citing
it as the “traditional Roman law principle.” By “natural parent,” the State
Department means a blood relationship with a U.S. citizen: “It is not enough
that the child is presumed to be the issue of the parents’ marriage by the laws
of the jurisdiction where the child was born.”

A purely genetic connection to the child is sufficient to establish parentage
in relatively few instances in American law. One is child support: even if the
genetic father has had no contact with the child, and has done nothing to
establish a relationship (or even been prevented from knowing about the child),
the genetic connection may be enough if no other presumed father is on the
scene. This article explores a second instance in which the genetic connection
is paramount: when an American citizen gives birth abroad. A genetic test works
well for children conceived coitally, but may wreak havoc for those conceived
using assisted reproduction techniques (ART). Citizenship has recently been
denied to the children of two American women who used anonymously donated
gametes to conceive and give birth to a child: one in Israel, and one in
Switzerland; in a third case, the U.S. Embassy refused to recognize the birth
mother as the child’s mother because she had used donated eggs and given birth
to the child in India.

Part I of this Article discusses the origins of jus sanguinis in Roman and
English common law, including ancient and medieval views of conception and
maternity in determining the child's bloodline. Not surprisingly, these views
differ significantly from those held today. Taking into account this scientific
background, Part II examines citizenship laws in early U.S. history, and
assumptions of who were the parents of a child, both in wedlock and out of
wedlock. While the definition of paternity has always taken note of biology as
well as a man’s relationship to the birth mother, science began to play a more
prominent role in the legal definition of parenthood once blood grouping and
blood tests were available in the early 1900s. Part III then introduces the law
of U.S. citizenship today, which in its main outlines is the same as first
codified in 1952. The ability of DNA testing to positively identify the father
in most cases, plus advances in ART that separate the two functions of the
birth mother – genetics and gestation – have greatly complicated the definition
of parentage for children, but the State Department has, in large part, continued
to use the same parentage standard first detailed in 1952. Part IV examines and
critiques three methods of identifying parentage: the State Department’s
preferred method (genetics), the common law parturient test, and the recently
developed intent test, to examine which method of determining parentage should
be used for children born abroad. Part V concludes the article.

Reproductive
behavior is governed by complex biological, cultural and psychological
relations, hence reproductive health and rights must be understood within the
context of relationships between men and women, communities and societies. This
research encompasses with these problems which concerned about the reproductive
health and rights of the women. It furthermore explains the vulnerability of
women and gender biased violence against them. This paper also laid stress on
the impact of men’s action over the reproductive health and rights of the women
and the key initiatives to deliver reproductive rights and services to the
women. Though, this paper also focuses on the rights of the surrogates’ mother
and the initiatives taken by the government for the enhancement of the
surrogacy and their rights in India. In this research we conceptualize the
incidents related to the surrogacy and the legal issues in the global scenario.
However, we also gestate the landscape of surrogacy in India, as it is new
concept for India and not acceptable as well on various portfolios so we also
laid focus on the social and economic background for the profound this concept
in the grass root level. While construing this research we also analysis the
Artificial Reproductive Technology (ART) bill, in that we critically analysis
it’s positive and negative aspects for the concept of surrogacy in India.
Eventually, this research also laid impact over the commissioning parents and
their rights regarding surrogacy. In the conclusion our research concludes
procreating a child in surrogate woman’ womb is grateful gift to those mothers
who cannot conceive child.

A Planned Parenthood affiliate in New York is leaving the organization
rather than comply with a policy that all affiliates must offer on-site
abortions, fueling hopes among anti-abortion activists of a split within
the abortion-rights movement. But the move is an isolated one that has
nothing to do with political battles, officials of the family planning
organization say, and the policy appears likely to take effect in the
new year with little disruption. . . .

A Conservative backbencher’s motion on sex-selective abortions caught
the ire of opposition parties Wednesday, with the NDP and Liberal
leaders claiming it was another attempt to outlaw abortion, while the MP
behind the proposal called it a stand for human rights.

The
volleys over Tory MP Mark Warawa’s motion are part of an ongoing
tug-of-war between anti-abortion MPs who want to claim the motion for
their cause, and advocates who want to keep the proposal distanced from
the politically controversial abortion debate. . . .

An open letter from Irish and American activists is calling on
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to address Ireland’s abortion laws
during her visit today and tomorrow.

The renewed look at Ireland’s abortion laws come in the aftermath of the tragic death
of an Indian citizen living in Ireland, Savita Halappanavar, due to
complications from her pregnancy and the refusal of her hospital to
perform an abortion. Ireland maintains some of the strictest abortion laws in the world, but has pledged to reexamine them following global interest in Halappanavar’s story. . . .

Lawyers for Montgomery County
on Thursday vigorously defended a controversial ordinance that requires
certain anti-abortion pregnancy centers to post signs warning that the
centers do not employ licensed medical personnel and urges pregnant
women to “consult with a licensed health care provider.”

Their arguments, made over the course of an hour and a half before a
dozen judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in
Richmond, were disputed by the centers, whose attorneys argued that the
signs violated their right to free speech. . . .

In a historic bipartisan vote on Tuesday, the Senate passed Sen. Jeanne
Shaheen's (D-N.H.) amendment to the 2013 National Defense Authorization
Act that would extend abortion insurance coverage to victims of rape in
the military. If the House of Representatives decides to include the
measure in its version of the defense bill, military servicewomen who
have become pregnant from rape will no longer have to pay out of pocket
for an abortion procedure for the first time since 1981. . . .